Islam and Democracy

by Bill Creasy

Islam as an religion is becoming linked to terrorism and repressive governments in the minds of the American public. It seems clear that the majority of the more than a billion Muslims in the world are not terrorists. It also seems clear that the terrorists are angry, frustrated, or desperate individuals. However, is Islam as a religion consistent with democracy? Can Islam give rise to a modern, democratic government that abhors terrorism and is more consistent with secular humanist values?

Experts in Islam argue about whether the Quran is consistent with democracy. An important aspect of Islam is the large degree to which it is subject to interpretation. Even though the Quran is accepted by Muslims as divine, the religion varies a lot in different countries because of the range of interpretations. The political systems of countries with majority Muslim populations also varies, depending on history and culture.

Judith Miller, writer for the New York Times, wrote, "Militant Islam takes many forms. While radical Islam asserts that Islam is the only force that can unify the Arabs,... what I have seen so far suggests the contrary.... There will not be a single, unified Islamic community, any more than there is a single Arab nation, even in the unlikely event that Islamic radicals topple every quasi-secular government in the Middle East." (God has Ninety-Nine Names, Simon & Schuster, 1996, p.14)

Can Islamic countries be compatible with our Western ideal of democracy? It appears that among the clergy, there isn't necessarily an acceptance of church-state separation in the basic doctrine. The Quran, according to doctrine, is the word of God about how to behave in this world, both in ethical and political areas. According to the fundamentalist doctrine, it is the ultimate source of knowledge.

This belief may present a basic conflict of Islam with democracy. Democracy implies that all people should have an equal voice in govenment. Islam can be interpreted to say that the clergy, who have the most detailed understanding of the Word of God, should have more to say about government than the average person. Moreover, their understanding should be absolute, as dictated by the doctrine, and not subject to vote or negotiation.

However, the picture is not that simple. Even according to Islamic doctrine, individuals are not bound to accept the word of a particular leader. They are free to choose a mosque or a leader whom they agree with. This approach is similar to the Protestant, as opposed to Catholic, doctrine. Each individual is answerable only to God for his or her actions. But it is not clear how this doctrine should be applied to politics.

There have been many attempts at theocratic governments during Islam's history. Because Islam is subject to interpretation, there are always competing factions who can't agree how to do things. In the first 200 years of Islam, the Islamic community had 4 civil wars. Islam split into two branches that still exist as rivals, the Sunnites and Shiites. (Miller, p. 96)

According to Karen Armstrong, author of Islam and The Battle for God, "even though ideologically there can be no separation between church and state, both Sunnis and Shiites developed a separation very early on." (from an interview on Salon.com, www.salon.com). As a result of this pragmatic, historical experience, many branches of Islam consider that religion should be separate from politics, a de facto separation of church and state. The Shiites consider any government to be a corrupting influence on religion, and have a stronger policy about separation of church and state.

The Center for the Study of Islam & Democracy is an institute in Washington, D.C., which advocates the promotion of democracy in the Muslim world (www.islam-democracy.org). However, the best argument that they seem to have in favor of the consistency of Islam and democracy is that when the Prophet died, he didn't appoint a successor, so presumably his followers were expected to choose one. (However, it is notable that both Moses and Jesus did appoint successors.)

It is likely that most of the clerics have learned that they would not be good at running a government, and that religion should be separate from politics for the good of both. There is little political leadership that arises from the religious orders. One notable exception was the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran, who made a deliberate, revolutionary attempt to create an Islamic republic. Even in Iran, though, secular political groups are becoming more important.

Uneducated Muslims may have ideological and cultural reasons for thinking that clerics can run the government. They see their religion as powerful in a time that they may feel powerless. This is a conflict with educated Muslims who understand technology and modernization and accept the idea of secular progress.

The Muslim societies are complicated by the history of repressive governments and past colonial rule by the West. They are also complicated by demographics. In Iran, for example, 72 % of the population is under 25 years old, and 50% are under 15.

It appears that the ideas of Islam are an important contribution to the opinions of its believers. However, it doesn't appear that Islam or its clergy have any strong ideas about the advantages of democracy. Instead, economic, historical, and demographic problems seem more important in the type of political systems that occur in the Muslim countries. As humanists, we should focus on ways to improve these people's lot in life, and assume that more tolerant politics and religious interpretations will follow.

Fareed Zakaria wrote in Newsweek that the United States should seek "the preconditions of democracy--the rule if law, individual rights, private property, independent courts, the separation of church and state.... Economic reform mean[s] the beginnings of a genuine rule of law." ("How to Save the Arab World", Newsweek, Dec. 24, 2001, p. 22-28). He suggests that the U.S. should insist that our Arab allies liberalize their economies to encourage the development of a business class.

These opinions reflect the author and not of the WASH Board.